Sam Matteson

Down the Rabbit Hole of Genetic Genealogy

I came to this investigation of my ancestors as a complete novice in the areas of genealogy and genetics. Now after a few months of study and effort, I am better informed—although still not an expert. Fortunately, there are services available to help which are at the same time accessible and powerful. The two that I have most successfully employed are 23andMe.com and Ancestry.com. These applications are complementary and provide slightly different information at a modest price (approximately $100 for the basic DNA analysis).

The former (23andMe) is focused primarily on health and general ancestral origins with only a few tools for genealogical research. Nevertheless, I was able to identify common ancestors with many individuals with their gracious help. In particular, I was able to identify specific genetic markers that suggest an Estimated Recent Shared Ancestor (ERSAs) among various subgroups of the nearly 1500 individuals (in each application) with whom I share significant lengths of DNA. Likewise using Ancestry.com, I identified relatives near and distant whose existence has helped answer genealogical questions that have been mysteries for decades.  But more about that later. First I must provide a simple primer on the essentials of genetic science for a general audience. If readers are already familiar with the topic he or she may wish to skip ahead to the subsequent sections. But they will miss the fun of what I have learned in recent days.

How We Become Who We Are

I, like most folk, came to the topic of genetics with a vague appreciation that the “blueprint” of how to assemble a human is stored in the genetic molecule DNA (DeoxyriboNucleic Acid). What I did not appreciate is how this very long double helical molecule (approximately two meters long if unraveled) is managed and stuffed into a tiny cell by the machinery of life. I learned that the DNA of humans is divided into 46 separate bundles bound up in 23 pairs. These pieces are the chromosomes. In the micrograph above we can see the image of some chromosomes. They are of different lengths and are “diploid,” that is, they exist in pairs that are held together at a point on their length so that they resemble microscopic “exes.”

Humans are eukaryotic creatures; that is, all their DNA is lumped in pieces of various length inside the nuclei of their cells.  More specifically, the nuclei of human cells contain 22 so-called autosomal chromosome pairs (numbered 1 to 22), and one pair of sex chromatids (designated X and Y and normally paired XX in females or XY in males). In the process of producing offspring, the gametes—the sperm and ovum—combine to pass on DNA derived from the parents. The 22 autosomal chromosomes and the sex chromosome are thus a 50%-50% combination of DNA derived from Mom and from Dad.

The process must be a little more complicated than this, of course, or there would be an accumulation of genetic material in each successive generation. In a process called meiosis, the chromosome pairs split in half before the formation of each “haploid” gamete, containing half the number of chromosomes of the normal cell. Thus, only half of the genetic material from each parent is inserted, respectively, into the sperm or ovum and then passed down to the next generation in the fertilized zygote. Problem solved.

But wait, there’s more—of course. Prior to meiosis the paired chromatids (that originated in the generation of the grandparents, the respective parents of mother and father) have undergone a mixing process called recombination by crossover. While the autosomal chromatids are still joined by a bundle of fibers called the centromere, the chromosomes in Mom and in Dad, prior to conception and prior to meiosis, can do some microscopic genetic acrobatics and flip to the other half so that when the chromosome ultimately splits into two halves, the genetic information becomes a mixture of the previous generation.

Ultimately the fertilized zygote will inherit half of its DNA from father and half from mother. Therefore, in the foregoing marvelous mechanism of biological engineering a mixture of traits inherited by our parents from their parents (our grandparents) gets passed on to us in a fleshly lottery. Because of the random sorting we share about (but rarely exactly) 25% of our DNA with each of our four grandparents and 50% of our parental DNA. On average the contribution to our genetic identity from each ancestor is diluted by a factor about ½ in each generation. This kind of delightful combinatorics arithmetic delights my physicist’s mind but leaves most folk cold. Considering a graphic representation (see figure 2) however may help communicate the beauty of this reality.

Suffice it to say that we can estimate (with increasing uncertainty the more distant the relation) the relatedness of two individuals just from the amount of DNA that they share (See a plot of the experimentally determined fraction of shared DNA in unique segments as derived from the Shared CM Project, https://dnapainter.com/tools/sharedcmv4. Check out a detailed explanation at  https://www.familysearch.org/blog/en/centimorgan-chart-understanding-dna/ ). The fewer the generations since we have a common ERSA (Estimated Recent Shared Ancestor) the greater will be (on average) the amount of our shared DNA.

 I should point out that all humans share 99.9% of the same DNA, that is, we are 1000 times more alike than we are different. In contrast consider that our most closely related primate cousins, chimpanzees and bonobos, each share only 98.7% of the base pair sequences (the amino acids abbreviated ATGC, for adenine, thymine, cytosine, and guanine) found in humans, albeit the apes have 24 chromosome pairs, one more than humans. Even though we humans differ by such a minuscule fraction of the 3 billion base pairs in our personal genome, 30 million disparate bases pairs are sufficient to distinguish us and make us genetically uniquely individual.

A Little Practice in Genetic Genealogy

Population geneticists have identified DNA sequences that are characteristic of various people groups. These sequences permit classification of human DNA sample by what are called “haplogroups” and allow an admixture analysis. For example, I descend—via my paternal line running through Henry Matteson (1642) who immigrated to Rhode Island in about 1666—from a gentleman who lived in Europe about 10,000 years ago. The web site 23andMe informs me that one in about 140 of their male subscribers have this haplotype, namely R-L48.

Despite the relative commonality of this haplotype, I discovered a male relative whose surname differed from that shared by me and my brother (who also bears the R-L48 haplotype).  Documentary genealogical research revealed, however, that my genetic cousin’s great grandfather changed his name during the Civil War from Tobias S. Matteson to the name of a disabled comrade of his Pennsylvania regiment, possibly to avoid being conscripted a second time after his discharge due to wounds. Tracing his pedigree back further uncovered that indeed my cousin is a descendant of the very same 7x great grandfather the patriarch Henry Matteson, called “The Immigrant.” Our families diverged about 360 years ago, but was exposed by a persistent genetic marker.

The combination of genetics and documentary genealogy is a powerful duo. In the interim since I last posted I have also helped my future son-in-law find the identity of his birth parents. While treasuring his deceased but beloved adoptive parents, he hoped to learn more about his physical heritage that he could share with his own biological children. In a relatively straightforward and surprisingly rapid investigation, I identified one of his DNA matches as a half-brother. Moreover, my son-in-law shared DNA with other descendants of a woman whose maiden name appeared on his birth record. By good fortune, another close match with a half-niece suggested the identity of his biological father. Using the method of genetic “triangulation” in which one identifies the individuals who share DNA segments with two other individuals we were able to build up a detailed family tree many generations deep. The code in Ancestry.com then matches up potential cousins from their crowd-shared family trees. In the process I was able to identify scores of living relatives and help him and his children connect with his previously unknown family. It was “straightforward” because the relationships were close. In contrast, in the case of our Miley investigation only third or fourth cousins who are independently descended from the mysterious 2x Great Grandfather Miley remain alive after about 180 years. We anticipate that we will share about 0.5% – 0.7% DNA with any surviving cousins.

The first issue we chose to address was the veracity of the family story that a “Miley” was James Marion Moates’ father. Of course, Rachel appears in the 1850 census next door to the Noah Moates family in Eucheanna, Florida and is listed as “Rachel Miley,” Head of Household. So the documentary evidence proves that she claimed Mr. Miley as her spouse, although no known record of a marriage exists. Originally, I submitted my sputum sample to 23andMe as did my brother and sister. Within a few months we had over a thousand DNA matches. Among those there were three whose last name was “Miley.” I contacted these individuals and with their help reconstructed their family trees back through sons of Robert David Miley (1762) and Elizabeth Goodman (1761) of Barnwell County, South Carolina. The closest relative of these was a descendant of William Goodman Miley (1812), an Alabama pioneer planter who lived down the road from the Moates clan in the period 1840-1847. The DNA match was consistent with a third cousin relationship, the sharing of a 2x great grandfather. Further genetic triangulation identified individuals who appear to share William Goodman Miley as an ERSA, consistent with his position as a 2x great grandfather of me and my siblings. What is more, over time I was able to identify over 100 other individuals who share Miley DNA who are not descended from the Moates line.

Therefore, the DNA evidence is compelling that my Great-great granddaddy is indeed a Miley-Goodman, a son of Robert and Elizabeth.

23andMe Miley Segment

What I learned from 23andMe was that I had inherited (presumably from my mother) a rather long segment of DNA on my 12th Chromosome that is shared by many descendants of Robert Miley (1762). In the figure below we see the segments shared by me and my siblings with a descendant of William Goodman Miley. One should note that my brother does not share the Chromosome 12 marker. In the genetic lottery he did not inherit this part of my grandfather’s Miley segment. This observation suggests that this present day and generation are our last best chance of solving the mystery of the Miley. Before the last few years accessible DNA analyses were unavailable. Moreover, the amount of DNA also becomes diluted in each successive generation and the difficulty of identifying relatives becomes more problematic. So the time is ripe for this study.

Not wanting to stake such a definitive claim on only one single DNA test, I also submitted a sample to AncestryDNA.com. The results were consistent with the 23andMe data. Among my matches were those of my aunt, my mother’s sister, granddaughter of James Marion Moates.  Using the family tree builder in Ancestry.com I was able to confirm that nearly 200 DNA-matched individuals are descended from Robert Miley and Elizabeth Goodman and are thus third to fourth cousins. Over twenty of the cousins are directly descended from William Goodman Miley.  In the next figure a so-called ancestry.com “Thruline” graphic shows seven of the children of Robert Miley (1762) and the number of identified matches in each line.

Therefore, the genetic genealogical results are unequivocal: I am descended from Robert Miley (as is my Aunt Ann Rowley). What is more, it is highly likely that my great grandfather is indeed William Goodman Miley.

Curiously, I have found no match in my DNA with any descendant of Samuel Miley or Robert Z, Miley, two contemporaries and neighbors of Rachel Moates Miley. While it is possible that the segment(s) that I (and my siblings) inherited from our mother’s Moates family was not inherited any of Sam or Bob Miley’s offspring, it strains credibility.

Conclusion

The DNA evidence is conclusive that the father of James Marion (Miley) Moates was a son of Robert Miley (1762) and was probably William Goodman Miley (1802).

In the next post we will pull together all the evidence to make a compelling case that William is my ancestor and we will attempt to reconstruct the events surrounding Grandfather Jim’s birth. Stay tuned.

Part The Second: Setting the Stage

The narrative that has captivated my imagination is not only the story of two people, namely Rachel Moates (1823) and an as-yet-unverified partner reputed to bear the surname “Miley,” but also it is a saga about family. Actually, it is a tale of two families: the Moates tribe and the Miley Clan. The stage for this drama is a swath of farm land near the often-shifting border between Pike County to the south and east and southern Montgomery County, far from any major city such as Montgomery or Troy. It was the 1840s, less than a decade after my European-American ancestors had dispossessed and evicted the indigenous Muscogee Creek people, removing most of them from the landscape to reservations west of the Mississippi River. Today, like those days of nearly two centuries ago, the landscape was a woodland with fields hacked out that grew subsistence gardens and cash crops of cotton. Transportation was crude, either on horseback, by wagon or buggy, or by “shank’s mare,” that is, on foot. Thus, a trip of eight miles was an investment of about half a day for the round trip at an average speed of four miles per hours. Therefore, longer trips such as 20-50 miles required overnight lodging or a trail camp before returning.  Thus the sections of land of Little Sandy Creek area is the stage for the interaction between the Moates and the Miley families and between Rachel Moates (1823) and Mr. Miley.

The Moates Clan

Into this wildness the Moates family, led by Noah Moates (1793) and his father William Moates (1760), ventured with their families, immigrating from South Carolina where their Scottish parents had landed in the new world in the century before. [In this narrative I will identify the various characters in this history with their name followed by the year of their birth, since names were frequently recycled in a family, generation upon generation. By this device I hope to minimize one potential pitfall of personal history, anachronistically scrambled genealogies.] William’s (1760) forbears had sailed to the Royal Colony of the Carolinas with hundreds of thousands of other Scots, fleeing the British oppression of the Scots following the collapse of the Jacobite rebellion of “forty-five.”  Subsequently, escaping the ever-more crowded early 19^th century Carolinas, William (1760) pushed westward, ultimately settling a half-quarter section (about 80 acres) in the Sandy Creek area in 1828. Over the next seven years the Moates clan, notably Noah, along with his kinsmen from South Carolina, son, William C. Moates (1815), and John T. “Motes” (1796), added to this homestead to build a contiguous enclave comprising the southern three fourths of Township 13 Range 20 Section 6.

Page 207 of the Land Receipt Book for Montgomery County, Alabama recording the receipt of $105.41 cash (equivalent to about $3,125 in 2020 dollars with a current land appraisal of approximately $184,000) from Noah “Moats” for the Southern ½ of the Northeast Quarter of Section Number 6 Township No 13 Range 20 dated January 1, 1833. Also appearing is the record of the purchase of the adjacent 80 acres (the N½ of the NE Quarter) by Mr. Armstrong Mitchell later in the month.

The property is owned today by a family trust the legacy of a prominent lumberman, Robert Dudley. Below is an aerial photograph of the land with the boundaries of the Moates holdings superimposed. Note that there remain tantalizing clearings among the hardwood trees where houses may have stood in the antebellum age.

The identity of the neighbors who held contiguous homestead allows us to locate with more precision where the family lived in the various census lists by comparing the names of the neighbors and the locations of their homesteads. It also gives a sense of the immediate community. A Township consisted of thirty sections each a square one mile by one mile, so that these neighbors in the section were a short walk away if one had a practical need or a desire for company.

Correspondence between modern parcel owned by JRBC Holdings LLC and original homestead of Moates enclave. The small creek is known as Little Sandy Creek. It appears in the 1848 land survey.

Looking at contemporaneous land surveys (see below) gives me a strange sense of immediacy that dry facts cannot convey. For example, I note with an inward satisfaction that the tract of US Highway 231 (The Troy Highway) follows the same path cutting diagonally across section 6 as did the dirt road that is documented in the 1848 survey. Many field borders still align with the ancient borders of quarter sections.

Noah (1793) had a younger brother, younger by a decade, Jonathan (1803) who also relocated from South Carolina to the Alabama frontier (in the mid-1820s) soon after the state of Alabama was organized in 1819. He married Miss Urquhart, the daughter of one of the Moates’ Sandy Creek neighbors. Jonathan settled forty-five miles east in Barbour County between the

1848 Land Survey of Township 13 Range 20. Note the cleared fields, the track of the “Troy Road” and Sandy Creek.

forks of the Choctawhatchee River, about 13 miles east of the Pea River. At that time settlers in Barbour County were still vulnerable to Indian attack, which may explain why Jonathan volunteered for the Alabama militia to fight in the Second Creek War of 1836-37. The conflict terminated at the Battle of Hodby Bridge on the Pea River just a few miles from his farm where the Muscogee Creek insurrectionists were decimated.

The Miley Brothers

            The Miley family also held lands in the area in the 1840s. Three brothers had moved to the Alabama frontier after the final subjugation of the Muscogee Confederation in the area in the victory of the European-Americans in the Second Creek War.  Three sons of Robert Miley (1762), of South Carolina— elder brother Samuel Miley (1792), William Goodman Miley (1802), and younger brother Robert Z. Miley (1815)—all of whom were born in Barnwell County, South Carolina to Robert (1762) and his first wife Mary Goodman Miley—acquired property in the area, Samuel and William near each other in Montgomery County and Robert a few miles away in Pike County.  Later they were joined in Dale/Coffee (the latter county organized in 1841) and Covington County by their half-brother Andrew Barnwell Miley (1818) where William also held a forty acre aliquot of a section near Elba, Alabama. The Miley brothers purchased land near one another and the Moates enclave. Below is an aerial view of the larger area (Google Earth) near the Montgomery County/Pike County border. Several important landmarks are labelled. Notably you will find the farms of Samuel (1792), William G. (1802) and Robert (1815) with the dates of purchase in parentheses in the figure.  Other prominent landmarks to notice are Pisgah Primitive Baptist Church founded in 1842.   A handsome historical marker stands outside the 1931 structure interpreting the site. It reads in part:

Constituted on August 27, 1842 on this site with six charter members including Moses and Sarah Rushton, Susannah Rushton, William and Emily Miley, and James Gardner. First structure built of logs by master carpenter Jesse Yon on land given by Moses Rushton, who moved to Montgomery County from Orangeburg District S.C.

Thus, William (1802) and his wife “Emily” Emmaline Oentz (aka “Owens”) apparently resided in the Sandy Creek area in about 1842.  Also note the identification of Briar Hill, Alabama which may have been mis-recalled or misheard to be “Briarville,” a place name unknown in the state. The historic Urquhart family cemetery is the final resting place of several of the Urquhart tribe, some in unmarked graves. Perhaps the body of Jonathan’s first wife lies beneath the trees there.

  

One addition area is relevant to our story. It is metaphorically speaking the “wings” of the stage of our drama.  William Goodman Miley (1802) purchased a forty acre tract in what was then Dale County in 1841 (the year the county was established), after appearing in the fifth decennial population census in 1840. His neighbors William Luker and Adam Hardy who both owned homestead near the Miley Coffee County “Elba Place” also appear in the census as nearby households, and therefore confirm his residence near the county seat of Elba. Moreover, the Bethany Primitive Baptist Church in which church records both brother and sister Miley appear.  In addition, Andrew (1818) was briefly moderator of the congregation in the 1850s before settling in the Andalusia, Alabama area as long-time pastor of the Bethel Primitive Baptist Church in Babbie, Alabama near Adalusia.

            Now the stage is set. The players are in place. A Miley 2x great grandfather is a possibility for me and my two siblings. In fact, there are many possibilities: Samuel (1792), William Goodman (1802), Robert (1815), or Andrew (1818)—all Mileys. In addition, we must not rule out prematurely other male members of the Miley family, such as eldest sons. But these four are the prime suspects, if indeed the family lore is accurate as far as it goes. Thus, the region was thick with Mileys, as “ticks on a hound” as the saying goes. For progress in resolving this mystery we must turn to other evidence, namely DNA autosomal genetic statistics and a forensic style inquiry that considers means, motive, opportunity, and any other circumstantial evidence. In this way we can identify who is the most likely candidate for our anonymous ancestor and then we will be better equipped to imagine the scenario of James Marion Miley Moates’ (1843) nativity.  The mystery lies before us. Indeed, quoting Sir Arthur William Conan Doyle’s most famous of detectives created in the 1880s we can say, “Let us waste no more time. ’The game is afoot!’”

A Historical Inquiry into the Life of James Marion Moates
Part the First

As I walk down the hallway in my Brother Dale’s house, a pair of pictures in ornate Victorian frames captures my attention. I examine the Ambrotype of a man. The face that gazes back at me is that of a young groom who at age 23 has already seen much suffering and hardship. As I learn from the notes typed by my mother and affixed to the rear of the frames, this is James Marion (Miley) Moates, my great grandfather. He does not smile, perhaps because of the customary formality of the 1866 wedding portrait, or perhaps it might be more than that. He had seen too much. He was born 3 November 1843 under dubious circumstances. His mother claimed the name “Miley,” as documented by the 1850 census of Walton County, Florida, where he is listed as “James Miley,” living with his mother Rachel, the head of the household. They appear in the enumeration adjacent to the family next door, the Noah Moates clan. Apparently she went by “Miley” even though there has never been any evidence of a legal marriage nor a legitimate spouse.

• 

• 

So who was his father? That has been a mystery for generations in the Moates family. Family stories are generous, suggesting that she was abandoned by an abusive husband. But I wonder. At the same time, I am intrigued. I must also agree with the declaration of my eldest daughter that “somehow knowing more about my ancestor tells me more about who I am.” I am possessed by an overwhelming desire to learn more. I suspect that he was born a bastard child of an illicit union with an unknown Miley. “In ‘the old days’ if children were born outside of marriage their legal surname was that of their mother, not their father” according to professional genealogists. (http://braswellgenealogy.blogspot.com/2007/10/bastardy-bonds.html) Illegitimate births were so common that “Bastardy Bonds” were issued routinely as an early form of child support.

 A Sketch of a Life

But how can I be sure? Are we really related to the Miley tribe? We do not want to impugn anyone’s reputation—even centuries late—without adequate evidence. James Marion later took the name of his grandfather Noah Moates, a respected farmer and Justice of the Peace, repudiating his father Miley. We in my family treasure a document that is a penmanship practice that reads, copied out several times in lovely nineteenth century script, “Tell me thy name and tell me now, James Marion Moates.” Indeed, he is listed in the 1860 census in his grandfather’s household as “James Jr. Moates, age 16, son, born Alabama.”

The clues of his journey are subtle and sometimes misleading. For example, James wears the uniform of a confederate soldier in the portrait, but it must be an affection borrowed for the occasion, since it is a new dress frock coat of a sergeant showing no wear. Jim Moates never ascended above the rank of private in his less-than-illustrious military career, and the sartorially splendid attire in the wedding portrait exceeded—by far—anything he ever owned. He was a typical volunteer: an untrained and sometimes undisciplined private soldier, owing more allegiance to family that to “The Cause.” Indeed, he and Uncle Francis Marion Miley were both reported AWOL, then as deserters. Their unauthorized leave occurred when Grandpa Noah’s Brother Jonathan Moates, a man in his fifties who had also enlisted with the younger men in the 1^st Florida Infantry (Confederate Army), lay mortally ill in hospital in Chattanooga. He ultimately died on 22 December 1862 after months of being listed “Absent, sick” on the muster rolls. “Noah Moates, bro.”—according to the muster cards—claimed his body in the early spring. Subsequently, Junior and Uncle Frank must have accompanied Grandfather Noah in carrying their Uncle’s body home to Euchee Anna, Walton County, Florida, a three hundred and fifty mile journey. “Uncle Jon-A” (as I imagine his affectionate nickname) was a tragic figure. He had fought in the Second Creek war in 1837 and had not originally declared his intention to join up due to his age, but ultimately did so, perhaps in part to look after Noah’s “boys.” He was recently divorced from his second wife and living with his brother’s family in 1860. The irony is stark that the old soldier was felled by illness (dysentery and measles were epidemic among the rebel troops) rather than in combat. The two infantrymen did finally return from their desertion and did rejoin their units without any apparent disciplinary action, just in time to participate in the ill-fated battle of Missionary Ridge, Tennessee. Calamity piled atop disaster. On the slopes of the ridge James Marion broke his leg during the battle on November 25, 1863. (Curiously, the next day was the first official federal observation of Thanksgiving Day according to President Lincoln’s decree. I wonder if the fact was of any import to Jim, even though he surely was thankful to be alive and to have survived without losing his limb, since the removal of a limb was the most common surgical procedure in battlefield hospitals according to historians of such things.  He evaded capture, however, unlike his namesake uncle and comrade-in-arms Francis Marion Moates, who—after capture—was shipped to Louisville, Kentucky and then on to Rock Island, Maryland where he was released after “taking the pledge” of allegiance to the Union and after volunteering for duty on the frontier, a commitment he apparently never fulfilled.

Meanwhile, after several months of convalescence James recovered in time to fight in the battles of Franklin and Nashville, Tennessee where he also was ultimately captured in December 1864, yet another incidence of hardship. In a strange cycle of history, I and my children now reside near where his military career ended. Later in life Jim would recount that he was “captured at Nashville and held under guard for five months,” that is, until the end of hostilities.  Time and time again I have passed the spot along Harding Pike where young James (He was 21 year old at the time.) was apprehended. Reports of the battle that broke the back of the Confederate Army of Tennessee are gory and devastating. Ultimately, James returned to Euchee Anna, near modern Defuniak Springs, Florida and began or resumed courting Miss Ruth Ann Dew, preacher Thomas Spencer Dew’s daughter. But he surely carried memories of death and defeat with him. Nevertheless, within a year after returning they were married and posed for the photographs that captured my attention. (See the gallery above.)

Where was James Born?

But the questions keep coming: Where was he born? From time to time J. M. Moates would answer alternatively “Montgomery County” or “Pike County, Alabama” when he was asked his birthplace. In one census of veterans he reported the site of his nativity as “Briarville, Alabama.”  There has never been a Briarville in Alabama. However, a Briar Hill in Pike County is still identified by a place name on maps; it is located near (less than 15 miles from) the several aliquots of land in Section 6, Township 13, Range 20 in Montgomery County east of Ramah that his grandfather and other kinsmen had purchased beginning in about 1825, nearly twenty years before his birth. We can put this mis-identification off to a faulty childhood memory, since he departed Alabama at age of four, or to the surveyor’s mishearing. In the next post I will explore how we can deduce the precise location of his infancy and toddlerhood.

We will also examine in the next post the identity of four Miley men who are potential candidates for Rachel Moates’ partner. These individuals are all the sons of Robert Miley (1762) and his wives Mary Goodman and Elizabeth Smoak of South Carolina. It is no spoiler to name these men: Samuel Miley (1790), William Goodman Miley (1802) and Robert Z. (or G.) Miley (1816), sons of Robert and Mary Goodman. In addition, Andrew Barnwell Miley (1818) son of the union of Robert and Elizabeth S. Miley lived in the neighboring county and we should not dismiss him without examination. I will adopt the practice of adding the year of the individual’s birth after his name as a means of helping identify the player, since often family names are shared and recycled in succeeding generations. In this investigation, I have run upon the difficulties common to genealogical research, struggles that plague every inquiry. These stumbling blocks range from misspellings of names and faulty transcriptions of manuscript, as for example in “Robert Z.” being confused with “Robert G.” to illogical mistakes of prior genealogical researchers, such as confusing a daughter in a census list with a wife.  Reconstructing family trees sometimes requires guess work and deduction, but hopefully not fabrication. We are indeed “connecting the dots” of often sparely available information. Nevertheless, there are facts that drive the conclusions.

But in addition, we have at our disposal a tool unavailable to prior generations, namely, DNA and genetic tracing. I and my two siblings submitted samples to 23andMe™ for DNA testing. Our DNA was compared with the thousands of genomes stored in their data base. They have discovered at this writing 1425 genetic data matches. These are my DNA cousins. Among those are 198 who share DNA segments with me and known descendants of the Miley family of Robert Miley (1762) of Barnwell County, South Carolina. So, “Yes, Virginia,” we are cousins to the Mileys. As an assurance of the conclusion, however, I have submitted a sample to AncestryDNA™ for independent testing and am awaiting the results. In a subsequent post we will examine the details of the analysis of our genetic linkage to the Miley clan that includes determining the heritage of individuals who share Miley genetic markers and in recruiting known Miley descendants to submit samples for DNA analysis. Lest the reader grow too impatient allow me to disclose that the early indications are that the descendants of James Marion Moates are also descendants of the Robert Miley and Mary Goodman family.

The Plan

In a final post we will assemble all the evidence in the style of a criminal investigation. The case will examine the means, motive, opportunity, any exculpatory or incriminating evidence as well as a theory of the “crime” for all the potential “suspects.” Hopefully a single individual will emerge whom the evidence implicates. Thus, while not an air-tight case, we will be able with some confidence to establish his identity.

As Sherlock Holmes famously stated “We must fall back upon the old axiom that when all other contingencies fail, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.”